Given that Donald's occupied with developing new cards and not new strategies, there is a point in not using the "big data" from online implementation, since they provide only hindsight. Those data would be much more interesting to other members of the forum. I miss councilroom.

That's something I disagree with. Big data, for example, could reveal the dominance of certain strategies and ignorance of others, or what kinds of cards have high "ragequit %"s, or trends like the perceived value of Silver and Gold. New cards could be designed to work well with overlooked existing cards, which really adds value to the game. The most popular cards (cards that get bought relatively high compared to their win %, or low rage quit %s) could be revisited to improve their chances of appearing in full random.

There's also immense value in doing simulations for cards that are likely to work well with a Big Money strategy (e.g. Patrol as DXV said) or are otherwise at risk of monolithic strategies, or compare far too favourably with similar cards.

Why not get super feedback and super playtesting? (that's not a question for anyone here)

I'm far more forgiving of duds now that expansions seem to be continuing indefinitely and people like LastFootnote are inside the tent, but when you buy any product you would hope that as much effort as possible has been put in to ensure it's a good quality product.

Big data, for example, could reveal the dominance of certain strategies and ignorance of others, or what kinds of cards have high "ragequit %"s, or trends like the perceived value of Silver and Gold. New cards could be designed to work well with overlooked existing cards, which really adds value to the game. The most popular cards (cards that get bought relatively high compared to their win %, or low rage quit %s) could be revisited to improve their chances of appearing in full random.

There's also immense value in doing simulations for cards that are likely to work well with a Big Money strategy (e.g. Patrol as DXV said) or are otherwise at risk of monolithic strategies, or compare far too favourably with similar cards.

Why not get super feedback and super playtesting? (that's not a question for anyone here)

We're already doing all of this in the Dominion community with existing cards. (And you won't be getting big data out of playtesting games.) Geronimoo does interesting simulations, while markus attempts to answer interesting questions about usage of different cards, culling from the stats of thousands of games. Donald X. is aware of all of those discussions, and takes part in them from time to time on Discord. If these "big data" observations aren't influencing him in his card creation, that's mostly because we either haven't generated enough interesting insights or those insights don't indicate anything of relevance to new cards that don't exist yet. I would suspect that the insights have influenced him, though much more subtly than him thinking, "let me see how many times people play Villages they buy on average and set Acting Troupe to give that many Villagers."

I'm far more forgiving of duds now that expansions seem to be continuing indefinitely and people like LastFootnote are inside the tent, but when you buy any product you would hope that as much effort as possible has been put in to ensure it's a good quality product.

You never stop being able to improve the expansions. You can choose to never release them; you can choose to release them knowing that they could have been better.

A crazy amount of time goes into each expansion. For sure more effort is not possible. If they're not good enough for you, I will just have to live with that.

I'm far more forgiving of duds now that expansions seem to be continuing indefinitely and people like LastFootnote are inside the tent, but when you buy any product you would hope that as much effort as possible has been put in to ensure it's a good quality product.

You never stop being able to improve the expansions. You can choose to never release them; you can choose to release them knowing that they could have been better.

A crazy amount of time goes into each expansion. For sure more effort is not possible. If they're not good enough for you, I will just have to live with that.

IMO Adventures, Empires and the 2nd editions are excellent so your process is more or less working (Not personally fond of nocturne but it's not "bad")

IMO Adventures, Empires and the 2nd editions are excellent so your process is more or less working (Not personally fond of nocturne but it's not "bad")

Thanks; we had a lot of fun playtesting Nocturne, but I would change it a lot at this point, which is not true of Adventures or Empires. I would probably split it into two sets, one with Night, Spirits, and Boons, and the other with Heirlooms and some other new mechanic. I wouldn't do Hexes (too slow). I would only do ~5 Fate cards.

IMO Adventures, Empires and the 2nd editions are excellent so your process is more or less working (Not personally fond of nocturne but it's not "bad")

Thanks; we had a lot of fun playtesting Nocturne, but I would change it a lot at this point, which is not true of Adventures or Empires. I would probably split it into two sets, one with Night, Spirits, and Boons, and the other with Heirlooms and some other new mechanic. I wouldn't do Hexes (too slow). I would only do ~5 Fate cards.

I play casually with a group IRL and Hexes have resulted in some of the most fun games we have played.

IMO Adventures, Empires and the 2nd editions are excellent so your process is more or less working (Not personally fond of nocturne but it's not "bad")

Thanks; we had a lot of fun playtesting Nocturne, but I would change it a lot at this point, which is not true of Adventures or Empires. I would probably split it into two sets, one with Night, Spirits, and Boons, and the other with Heirlooms and some other new mechanic. I wouldn't do Hexes (too slow). I would only do ~5 Fate cards.

For what it's worth, I'm glad it didn't go down that way. The things that are commonly complained about (increased setup complexity, slow down of the game) are obviously real, but I (and those in my game group) have found their impact to be overstated. Some of the reasons for that come down to personal preference or how I choose to organize and setup the game, so I'm not suggesting that those who feel otherwise are wrong. I just want to share that there are those of us out here who think Nocturne is fine how it is.

What are your thoughts on people playing Dominion in Tabletop Simulator without having bought a physical copy of Dominion or a Dominion Online subscription?

I don't lose sleep over it. There is a publisher, there is an online publisher, I can only come out so strongly in favor of "screw those guys." We let you play Dominion itself for free on ShuffleIT, and with expansions if your opponent has them. If we ever don't have an online version I imagine we will go back to letting people have free ones.

IMO Adventures, Empires and the 2nd editions are excellent so your process is more or less working (Not personally fond of nocturne but it's not "bad")

Thanks; we had a lot of fun playtesting Nocturne, but I would change it a lot at this point, which is not true of Adventures or Empires. I would probably split it into two sets, one with Night, Spirits, and Boons, and the other with Heirlooms and some other new mechanic. I wouldn't do Hexes (too slow). I would only do ~5 Fate cards.

For what it's worth, I'm glad it didn't go down that way. The things that are commonly complained about (increased setup complexity, slow down of the game) are obviously real, but I (and those in my game group) have found their impact to be overstated. Some of the reasons for that come down to personal preference or how I choose to organize and setup the game, so I'm not suggesting that those who feel otherwise are wrong. I just want to share that there are those of us out here who think Nocturne is fine how it is.

Maybe the other thing that went with Heirlooms would have been great. Stuff happens instead of other stuff happening. It's okay for fun stuff to go into the outtakes due to having problems; I replace it with fun stuff with fewer problems. I mean there would be people defending every fun thing that didn't actually make it into the sets. People defend Alchemy, want more of it. You know.

Maybe the other thing that went with Heirlooms would have been great. Stuff happens instead of other stuff happening. It's okay for fun stuff to go into the outtakes due to having problems; I replace it with fun stuff with fewer problems. I mean there would be people defending every fun thing that didn't actually make it into the sets.

If I had your perspective, your knowledge of what other option were on the table, I might come to the same conclusion. Alas. I only know what I know.

Was Nocturne designed especially with full random in mind? To me it's felt like, these are some of my favorite mechanics but it gets a bit overwhelming when you're playing with lots of Nocturne cards. It solves the issue that Dark Ages and Prosperity have of having a really fun mechanic that only 3 cards use, so I can see that being a consideration. But I know you've said you mostly play with two or so expansions at a time.

Was Nocturne designed especially with full random in mind? To me it's felt like, these are some of my favorite mechanics but it gets a bit overwhelming when you're playing with lots of Nocturne cards. It solves the issue that Dark Ages and Prosperity have of having a really fun mechanic that only 3 cards use, so I can see that being a consideration. But I know you've said you mostly play with two or so expansions at a time.

Yes I playtest mostly with two expansions at once - 5 cards from the new set, 5 from a single older set. So, no, it was not designed for full random specifically.

Was Nocturne designed especially with full random in mind? To me it's felt like, these are some of my favorite mechanics but it gets a bit overwhelming when you're playing with lots of Nocturne cards. It solves the issue that Dark Ages and Prosperity have of having a really fun mechanic that only 3 cards use, so I can see that being a consideration. But I know you've said you mostly play with two or so expansions at a time.

Yes I playtest mostly with two expansions at once - 5 cards from the new set, 5 from a single older set. So, no, it was not designed for full random specifically.

This is actually how I usually randomize my kingdoms - only cards from two large expansions, or two large and one small (and sometimes some promos). I find that cards within a single expansion tend to interact better, and some sets interact better with specific other sets (like Dark Ages + Alchemy, Properity + Guilds).

Have you ever thought about doing non-functional promos instead of kingdom cards/events? I mean stuff that has no impact on the game but is cool to have or look at, like a trash mat with different art or special coins or something.

Have you ever thought about doing non-functional promos instead of kingdom cards/events? I mean stuff that has no impact on the game but is cool to have or look at, like a trash mat with different art or special coins or something.

Jay isn't interested in doing alternate art stuff. A significant argument is: some people are going to feel obligated to get whatever it is, to have everything; we're happier if the thing they feel obligated to get is something worth having.

Have you ever thought about doing non-functional promos instead of kingdom cards/events? I mean stuff that has no impact on the game but is cool to have or look at, like a trash mat with different art or special coins or something.

Way back, one of the games magazines had some playmats for Dominion, with spaces for your deck and discard pile and a tiny "in play" area.

Have you ever thought about doing non-functional promos instead of kingdom cards/events? I mean stuff that has no impact on the game but is cool to have or look at, like a trash mat with different art or special coins or something.

Way back, one of the games magazines had some playmats for Dominion, with spaces for your deck and discard pile and a tiny "in play" area.

As it happens, I've been teaching a lot of new people Dominion in the past week or four. A deck-and-discard mat would actually help a lot, given how easy people find it to get the discard pile confused with in-play. And you have to wait until someone plays a gainer then draw which triggers a reshuffle before it's even apparent to them why it can matter.

As it happens, I've been teaching a lot of new people Dominion in the past week or four. A deck-and-discard mat would actually help a lot, given how easy people find it to get the discard pile confused with in-play. And you have to wait until someone plays a gainer then draw which triggers a reshuffle before it's even apparent to them why it can matter.